- 13 -
liability. Even if the Appeals Office considers a challenge to
the underlying tax liability where one of the two above
situations obtains, the Court may not review the determination on
the issue because it was not properly part of the hearing.
Sabath v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-222; sec. 301.6330-
1(e)(3), Q&A-E11, Proced. & Admin. Regs.; see also Behling v.
Commissioner, 118 T.C. 572, 578-579 (2002).
The Court has held that when the IRS submits in a Federal
bankruptcy proceeding a proof of claim for unpaid taxes, the
taxpayer has an opportunity to dispute his tax liability within
the meaning of section 6330(c)(2)(B). See Kendricks v.
Commissioner, 124 T.C. 69, 77 (2005); Sabath v. Commissioner,
supra. Petitioner is therefore precluded from challenging his
liability for the additions to tax under section 6651(a)(2) in
this case.
In any event, petitioner, having admitted that the taxes
were not timely paid, testified that he chose to pay other
creditors instead of paying his tax liabilities. He provided no
documentary evidence on the issue, and his testimony fell short
of carrying his burden to show that there is reasonable cause for
his failure to pay timely. See Higbee v. Commissioner, 116 T.C.
438, 446 (2001); sec. 301.6651-1(c), Proced. & Admin. Regs.
Petitioner may also be asking for an abatement of the
addition to tax. Section 6404(f) allows for the abatement of an
addition to tax attributable to erroneous written advice by the
IRS. Petitioner has not argued or proved that he received any
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011